EDIT: LINK - https://reddit.com/r/SneerClub/comments/yodmju/i_really_thought_this_was_a_brilliant_satire_at/
The uber-cool techbro is in the comments giving us such gems as:
I stand by what I said. People will implement it soon, if they haven’t already. Aesthetic rating networks are a thing, and image generators are capable of combinatorial generalization, so it’s probably possible to use search (or maybe even gradient descent) to find images that are better than the ones in the training set (according to the metric), and then train it with those. The success of these techniques depends on the critic not being goodharted, so the results might be inferior to training it with human-curated data, but that is more expensive. Is there any flaw in this reasoning?
When asked what in the living hell is an “aesthetic rating network” he replied:
Take a set of prompts. Generate many images for each. Select the best ones according to the network as long as they are sufficiently realistic (according to the generator or other net) and still match the prompt. Finetune on those. Or something like that
My criteria for best image is whatever someone considers the best image. This varies between people, but models can take this into account. Other areas of art (all of them?) also follow the pattern of there being a data structure that people can prefer over others, and optimizing it is a problem that machines will eventually basically solve.
I’m not mistaken. People have preferences over trajectories reality can take. Part of that considers whether what they see is pretty (but obviously art is about more than that). If you want to solve art (or understand it properly at all) you need access to that rating function. You can do it by either studying the brain directly or by observing human behavior (like the score they give to an image) and fitting a model to reconstruct that part of their minds. I’m pretty sure the vast majority of artists don’t think about art this way, but that’s how you study it in mathematical terms.
:chefs-kiss:
I love techbrains. They’re so unused. Completely fresh and wrinkle-free.
I think language being taught in school is fine but honestly we go about it in bad ways. Obviously cool and good, literacy and helping children grow vocabulary through expanding their reading. Bad and lame: having children memorize vocabulary lists and do spelling bees. Spelling is not actually important to comprehensive writing this has been proven over and over again and mostly it is learned naturally through reading and writing. People become more literate through reading faster. Language is about context and context and use drives vocabulary acquisition.
Also, this is a personal soapbox for me on this issue but IT IS A FUCKING CRIME THAT WE DO NOT TEACH SIGN LANGUAGE TO EVERY CHILD. Sign language is cool, inclusive and USEFUL! Most countries have their own sign language. Here in America we have ASL and it is dope and interesting and actively being developed even today. Learn a sign language. Be cool. Sign to your friends in a noisy club. Across a parking lot. Say things discretely to each other without others hearing. Oh, and maybe make a deaf friend or something.
Doesn't this kind of fall apart a lot if everybody knows sign language
No, why would it? People need to see it to understand it and there are situations where you can't speak to someone across the room without others hearing but you can throw signs behind their backs.
Come on think about it for even 5 seconds my person.
Well you can talk in secret code that non-deaf adults over a certain age wouldn't know since they wouldn't have learned it in school and you would have
Or, you know, do signs where others can't see but would otherwise hear you. You can talk to people discretely even though all the hearing people around you all speak the language. It works in a similar way with sign language.
Yep, it takes significant time investment absorbing that language, between reading and listening and a couple of hours per week is never going to be enough.
It is hilarious how these people go from basic premises to the most absurd conclusions.
"Oh yes of course schools don't do a good job teaching foreign languages... THEREFORE the obvious solution is a live Google Universal Translator subscription so you'll never ever hear or see anyone speak anything expect English ever again!"